Sentences with phrase «year mean global temperature»

And that's in fact precisely what the figure shows «'' that the 10 - year mean global temperature centered around 2010 is the roughly the same as the mean global temperature centered around 2005.

Dr. James Hansen — NASA GISS — 15 January 2013 «The 5 - year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slowdown in the growth rate of the net climate forcing.»

Those in the know like erudite James Hansen, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observe, «the five - year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.»

But a «10 - year «standstill» in the five - year mean global temperature» could equal a «15 - year «pause» in the average annual temperature».

James E. Hansen tells us «the five - year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade» (which isn't much different).

Hansen» rationalization of why, (as he states) «the five - year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade», is interesting background information, but, of course, does not change the observed fact that there is this standstill, which he acknowledges.

The five - year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing.

And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, «the five - year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.»

Not exact matches

Even the most optimistic estimates of the effects of contemporary fossil fuel use suggest that mean global temperature will rise by a minimum of 2 °C before the end of this century and that CO2 emissions will affect climate for tens of thousands of years.

And of course, exceeding the 1.5 °C threshold for even an entire year would not mean that global temperatures had in fact risen to that point, never (at least within our lifetime) to drop back below it as it's too short of a timeframe to make that determination.

Studies of sea level and temperatures over the past million years suggest that each 1 °C rise in the global mean temperature eventually leads to a 20 - metre rise in sea level.

With an El Niño now under way — meaning warm surface waters in the Pacific are releasing heat into the atmosphere — and predicted to intensify, it looks as if the global average surface temperature could jump by around 0.1 °C in just one year.

In the last 40 years, temperatures in parts of the country have gone up by as much 4.5 degrees F — well over the global mean rise of 1 degree.

The lower 48 states are projected to cross the 2 - degree C warming threshold about 10 to 20 years earlier than the global mean annual temperature, they note.

«The first step was to reconstruct the history of global mean temperatures for the last 784,000 years, using combined data from marine sediment cores, ice cores, and computer simulations covering the last eight glacial cycles,» said Friedrich, a post-doctoral researcher at IPRC.

He said he does think, however, that there will a broader shift to warmer ocean conditions that will last for several years and that means that global temperatures will hover around the level they have recently reached before moving upward again, like stairs on a staircase.

This means that if the GCR - warming hypothesis is correct, this increase in GCRs should actually be causing global cooling over the past five decades, and particularly cold temperatures in recent years.

Global mean surface temperatures have risen by 0.74 °C ± 0.18 °C when estimated by a linear trend over the last 100 years (1906 — 2005).

Early on in the temperature record, the red and blue lines diverge because natural factors meant the full impact of greenhouse gases on temperatures wasn't being felt, but in recent years, the two lines match closely, showing how much greenhouse gases are dominating global temperatures.

The global mean temperature rise of less than 1 degree C in the past century does not seem like much, but it is associated with a winter temperature rise of 3 to 4 degrees C over most of the Arctic in the past 20 years, unprecedented loss of ice from all the tropical glaciers, a decrease of 15 to 20 % in late summer sea ice extent, rising sealevel, and a host of other measured signs of anomalous and rapid climate change.

That mean global tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with the SOI of 5 — 7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to account for most of the temperature variation.

Because climate systems are complex, increases in global average temperatures do not mean increased temperatures everywhere on Earth, nor that temperatures in a given year will be warmer than the year before (which represents weather, not climate).

Five hundred to seven hundred million years ago, our planet had what scientists have determined to be another severe period of cold, with the global mean temperature somewhere around 10 degrees F. Again, hardly a good candidate planet for life.

To contribute to an understanding of the underlying causes of these changes we compile various environmental records (and model - based interpretations of some of them) in order to calculate the direct effect of various processes on Earth's radiative budget and, thus, on global annual mean surface temperature over the last 800,000 years.

The average temperature on Earth has barely risen over the past 16 years, indicating that global warming is currently taking a break - though that doesn't mean it's over yet.

If mean global temperatures trending significantly upward over the last 100 years isn't worrying enough for you, how about that giant piece of Antarctica that is about to crack off and sink into the ocean... I don't know how the existence of global warming is still a debate!

* However, the same panel then concluded that «the warming trend in global - mean surface temperature observations during the past 20 years is undoubtedly real and is substantially greater than the average rate of warming during the twentieth century.

Figures 1 and 2 of the post are referenced to the year 2000; however, since 2000 the world has been on an anthropogenic emissions path leading to at least a 5oC mean global temperature rise by 2100.

«Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global - mean tropospheric temperature.»

They did state with a «high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries «-- this is equivalent to the strengthening of the statements made in AR4 concerning the last 500 years.

(2) What proportion of model runs from a multi-model ensemble produce global mean temperatures at or below (on average) the actual measurement for the last 10 years?

However, and this is important, because of the biases and the difficulty in interpolating, the estimates of the global mean absolute temperature are not as accurate as the year to year changes.

However, the annual mean predictions for the global temperature that they issue every year does have some skill — being based mainly on the state of ENSO at the start of the year.

The occurrence of El Ninos in particular years, and their strength, will somewhat affect the global and tropical mean temperatures, but unless El Nino starts doing something really, really different, this effect is likely to be much smaller than the temperature increase due to doubling CO2.

That means that global albedo has also been low and could explain global temperatures remaining high after last years El Nino.

Thus, the simplest thing to do is to: a) construct a time series of annual global temperature averages, add a random component to each year (value drawn from a gaussian with the given standard deviation and mean zero).

Do you mean that the global mean temperature for the whole of the following year (1992?)

For instance, whether the 2004 global mean temperature anomaly places it in the top 4 or bottom 4 years is a fact regardless of any political spin people might care to place on it.

Assuming a global mean temperature increase in the year 2100 of 4 K, eight experts assess the probability of triggering an AMOC collapse as significantly different from zero, three of them as larger than 40 %.

About 400K years ago, the Holsteinian interglacial, also saw global mean temperatures about 1 °C warmer.

One way to look at the climate is that global mean surface temperatures have wandered up and down, to the left and the right, warmer and cooler, over the last thousand years, but have generally stayed a straight course, represented by the dashed line placed on the graph by the I.P.C.C. in 1990.

Transient climate sensitivity: The global mean surface - air temperature achieved when atmospheric CO2 concentrations achieve a doubling over pre-industrial CO2 levels increasing at the assumed rate of one percent per year, compounded.

Was the global mean temperature for the whole of the following year (1992?)

NAO and PDO have little or no correlation to the global mean temperature, and your implication that you have 20 year predictability in either is laughable.

An increase in data coverage will affect the estimated variance and one - year autocorrelation associated with the global mean temperature, which also should influence the the metric.

Global climate change risks are high to very high with global mean temperature increase of 4 °C or more above preindustrial levels in all reasons for concern (Assessment Box SPM.1), and include severe and widespread impacts on unique and threatened systems, substantial species extinction, large risks to global and regional food security, and the combination of high temperature and humidity compromising normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors in some areas for parts of the year (high confidGlobal climate change risks are high to very high with global mean temperature increase of 4 °C or more above preindustrial levels in all reasons for concern (Assessment Box SPM.1), and include severe and widespread impacts on unique and threatened systems, substantial species extinction, large risks to global and regional food security, and the combination of high temperature and humidity compromising normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors in some areas for parts of the year (high confidglobal mean temperature increase of 4 °C or more above preindustrial levels in all reasons for concern (Assessment Box SPM.1), and include severe and widespread impacts on unique and threatened systems, substantial species extinction, large risks to global and regional food security, and the combination of high temperature and humidity compromising normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors in some areas for parts of the year (high confidglobal and regional food security, and the combination of high temperature and humidity compromising normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors in some areas for parts of the year (high confidence).

Another equally important challenge is the fact that there are pronounced ~ 11 - year variations in the CRF, but the presence of ~ 11 - year variations in the global mean temperature are much less pronounced than the trend over the 3 — 4 most recent decades.

«He also predicted that this year would come very close to a new record high global mean temperature, and is clearly going to be right.

If the CRF were so important (and the cloud response near - instantaneous) why do we not see more pronounced ~ 11 - year variations in the global mean temperature?

My understanding is that GCMs are run several times with known forcings (as far as we can determine them) but random natural variability (e.g. ENSO), so the end result is an «ensemble» of model runs characterised by mean, standard deviation etc. rather than following precisely the year - to - year variations of global temperature.